Lecture 2. The Religion of Antichrist

{62} ST. JOHN tells us that "every spirit that confesseth not
that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is that spirit of Antichrist,
which even now already is in the world." It was the
characteristic of Antichrist, that he should openly deny our Lord
Jesus Christ to be the Son of God come in the flesh from heaven. So
exactly and fully was this description to answer to him, that to deny
Christ might be suitably called the spirit of Antichrist; and the
deniers of Him might be said to have the spirit of Antichrist, to be
like Antichrist, to be Antichrists. The same thing is stated in a
former chapter. "Who is the Liar, but he that denieth that Jesus
is the Christ? he is the Antichrist, that denieth the Father and the
Son. Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father;" [1
John ii. 22, 23.] from which words, moreover, it would appear that
Antichrist will be led on from rejecting the Son of God to the
rejecting of God altogether, either by implication or practically.

I shall now make some further observations on the characteristic
marks of the predicted enemy of the Church; and, as before, I shall
confine myself to the interpretations of Scripture given by the early
Fathers.

My reason for doing so is simply this,—that on so difficult a
subject as unfulfilled prophecy, I really can {63} have no opinion of
my own, nor indeed is it desirable I should have, or at least that I
should put it forward in any formal way. The opinion of any one
person, even if he were the most fit to form one, could hardly be of
any authority, or be worth putting forward by itself; whereas the
judgment and views of the early Church claim and attract our special
regard, because for what we know they may be in part derived from
traditions of the Apostles, and because they are put forward far more
consistently and unanimously than those of any other set of teachers.
Thus they have at least greater claims on our attention than those of
other writers, be their claims little or great; if they are little,
those of others are still less. The only really strong claim which can
be made on our belief, is the clear fulfilment of the prophecy. Did we
see all the marks of the prophecy satisfactorily answered in the past
history of the Church, then we might dispense with authority in the
parties setting the proof before us. This condition, however, can
hardly be satisfied, because the date of Antichrist comes close upon
the coming of Christ in judgment, and therefore the event will not
have happened under such circumstances as to allow of being appealed
to. Nor indeed is any history producible in which are fulfilled all
the marks of Antichrist clearly, though some are fulfilled here and
there. Nothing then is left us, (if we are to take up any opinion at
all,—if we are to profit, as Scripture surely intends, by its
warnings concerning the evil which is to come,) but to go by the
judgment of the Fathers, whether that be of special authority in this
matter or not. To them therefore I have had recourse already, and now
shall have recourse again. To continue, then, the subject with the
early Fathers as my guides. {64}

1.

It seems clear that St. Paul and St. John speak of the same enemy
of the Church, from the similarity of their descriptions. They both
say, that the spirit itself was already at work in their day.
"That spirit of the Antichrist," says St. John, "is now
already in the world." "The mystery of iniquity doth already
work," says St. Paul. And they both describe the enemy as
characterized by the same especial sin, open infidelity. St. John
says, that "he is the Antichrist that denieth the Father and
the Son;" while St. Paul speaks of him in like manner as
"the adversary and rival of all that is called God, or
worshipped;" that "he sitteth as God in the Temple of
God, setting forth himself that he is God." In both these
passages, the same blasphemous denial of God and religion is
described; but St. Paul adds, in addition, that he will oppose all
existing religion, true or false, "all that is called God, or
worshipped."

Two other passages of Scripture may be adduced, predicting the same
reckless impiety; one from the eleventh chapter of Daniel: "The
king shall do according to his will; and he shall exalt himself and
magnify himself above every god, and shall speak marvellous
things against the God of gods, and shall prosper till the
indignation be accomplished ... Neither shall he regard the God of
his fathers, nor the Desire of women, nor regard any god—for
he shall magnify himself above all."

The other passage is faintly marked with any prophetic allusion in
itself, except that all our Saviour's sayings have a deep meaning, and
the Fathers take this in particular to have such. "I am come in
My Father's Name, and ye receive Me not; if another shall come in
his own name, him ye will receive." [John v. 43.] This they
consider {65} to be a prophetic allusion to Antichrist, whom the Jews
were to mistake for the Christ. He is to come "in His own
name." Not from God, as even the Son of God came, who if any
might have come in the power of His essential divinity, not in God's
Name, not with any pretence of a mission from Him, but in his own
name, by a blasphemous assumption of divine power, thus will
Antichrist come.

To the above passages may be added those which speak generally of
the impieties of the last age of the world, impieties which we may
believe will usher in and be completed in Antichrist:—

"Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased
... Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried: but the wicked
shall do wickedly; and none of the wicked shall understand, but the
wise shall understand." [Dan. xii. 4, 10.] "In the last days
perilous times shall come, for men shall be lovers of their own
selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to
parents, unthankful, unholy, without natural affection, trucebreakers,
false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
traitors, heady, high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of
God, having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof:"
[2 Tim. iii. 2-5.] "scoffers walking after their own lusts, and
saying, Where is the promise of His coming?" [2 Pet. iii. 3, 4.]
"despising government, presumptuous ... self-willed, not afraid
to speak evil of dignities ... promising men liberty, while themselves
the servants of corruption:" [2 Pet. ii. 10, 19.] and the like.

2.

I just now made mention of the Jews: it may be well {66} then to
state what was held in the early Church concerning Antichrist's
connexion with them.

Our Lord foretold that many should come in His name, saying,
"I am Christ." It was the judicial punishment of the Jews,
as of all unbelievers in one way or another, that, having rejected the
true Christ, they should take up with a false one; and Antichrist will
be the complete and perfect seducer, towards whom all who were
previous are approximations, according to the words just now quoted,
"If another shall come in his own name, him ye will
receive." To the same purport are St. Paul's words after
describing Antichrist; "whose coming," he says, "is ...
with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish,
because they received not the love of the Truth, that they might be
saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion
that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned who
believed not the Truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

Hence, considering that Antichrist would pretend to be the Messiah,
it was of old the received notion that he was to be of Jewish race and
to observe the Jewish rites.

Further, St. Paul says that Antichrist should "sit in the
Temple of God;" that is, according to the earlier Fathers, in the
Jewish Temple. Our Saviour's own words may be taken to support this
notion, because He speaks of "the Abomination of Desolation"
(which, whatever other meanings it might have, in its fulness denotes
Antichrist) "standing in the holy place." Further,
the persecution of Christ's witnesses which Antichrist will cause, is
described by St. John as taking place in Jerusalem. "Their dead
bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, (which spiritually
is called Sodom and Egypt,) where also our Lord was crucified."
{67}

Now here a remark may be made. At first sight, I suppose, we should
not consider that there was much evidence from the Sacred Text for
Antichrist taking part with the Jews, or having to do with their
Temple. It is, then, a very remarkable fact, that the apostate emperor
Julian, who was a type and earnest of the great enemy, should, as he
did, have taken part with the Jews, and set about building their
Temple. Here the history is a sort of comment on the prophecy, and
sustains and vindicates those early interpretations of it which I am
reviewing. Of course I must be understood to mean, and a memorable
circumstance it is, that this belief of the Church that Antichrist
should be connected with the Jews, was expressed long before Julian's
time, and that we still possess the works in which it is contained. In
fact we have the writings of two Fathers, both Bishops and martyrs of
the Church, who lived at least one hundred and fifty years before
Julian, and less than one hundred years after St. John. They both
distinctly declare Antichrist's connexion with the Jews.

The first of them, Irenæus, speaks as follows: "In the Temple
which is at Jerusalem the adversary will sit, endeavouring to show
himself to be the Christ."

And the second, Hippolytus: "Antichrist will be he who shall
resuscitate the kingdom of the Jews." [Note
1]

3.

Next let us ask, Will Antichrist profess any sort of religion at
all? Neither true God nor false god will he worship: so far is clear,
and yet something more, and {68} that obscure, is told us. Indeed, as
far as the prophetic accounts go, they seem at first sight
incompatible with each other. Antichrist is to "exalt himself
over all that is called God or worshipped." He will set himself
forcibly against idols and idolatry, as the early writers agree in
declaring. Yet in the book of Daniel we read, "In his estate shall
he honour the god of forces; and a god whom his fathers knew not shall
he honour with gold and silver, and with precious stones and
pleasant things. Thus shall he do in the most strongholds with a strange
god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase with glory."
[Dan. xi. 38, 39.] What is meant by the words translated "god of
forces," and afterwards called "a strange god," is
quite hidden from us, and probably will be so till the event; but
anyhow some sort of false worship is certainly predicted as the mark
of Antichrist, with this prediction the contrary way, that he shall
set himself against all idols, as well as against the true God.
Now it is not at all extraordinary that there should be this
contrariety in the prediction, for we know generally that infidelity
leads to superstition, and that the men most reckless in their
blasphemy are cowards also as regards the invisible world. They cannot
be consistent if they would. But let me notice here a remarkable
coincidence, which is contained in the history of that type or shadow
of the final apostasy which scared the world some forty or fifty years
ago,—a coincidence between actual events and prophecy sufficient to
show us that the apparent contradiction in the latter may easily be
reconciled, though beforehand we may not see how; sufficient to remind
us that the all-watchful eye, and the all-ordaining hand of God is
still over the world, and that the seeds, sown in prophecy above two
thousand years since, {69} are not dead, but from time to time, by
blade and tender shoot, give earnest of the future harvest. Surely the
world is impregnated with the elements of preternatural evil, which
ever and anon, in unhealthy seasons, give lowering and muttering
tokens of the wrath to come!

In that great and famous nation over against us, once great for its
love of Christ's Church, since memorable for the deeds of blasphemy,
which leads me here to mention it, and now, when it should be pitied
and prayed for, made unhappily, in too many respects, our own model—followed
when it should be condemned, and admired when it should be excused,—in
the Capital of that powerful and celebrated nation, there took place,
as we all well know, within the last fifty years, an open apostasy
from Christianity; nor from Christianity only, but from every kind of
worship which might retain any semblance or pretence of the great
truths of religion. Atheism was absolutely professed;—and yet in
spite of this, it seems a contradiction in terms to say it, a certain
sort of worship, and that, as the prophet expresses it, "a
strange worship," was introduced. Observe what this was.

I say, they avowed on the one hand Atheism. They prevailed upon a
wretched man, whom they had forced upon the Church as an Archbishop,
to come before them in public and declare that there was no God, and
that what he had hitherto taught was a fable. They wrote up over the
burial-places that death was an eternal sleep. They closed the
churches, they seized and desecrated the gold and silver plate
belonging to them, turning, like Belshazzar, those sacred vessels to
the use of their impious revellings; they formed mock processions,
clad in priestly garments, and singing profane hymns. They annulled
the divine ordinance of marriage, resolving it {70} into a mere civil
contract to be made and dissolved at pleasure. These things are but a
part of their enormities.

On the other hand, after having broken away from all restraint as
regards God and man, they gave a name to that reprobate state itself
into which they had thrown themselves, and exalted it, that very
negation of religion, or rather that real and living blasphemy, into a
kind of god. They called it LIBERTY, and they literally worshipped it
as a divinity. It would almost be incredible, that men who had flung
off all religion should be at the pains to assume a new and senseless
worship of their own devising, whether in superstition or in mockery,
were not events so recent and so notorious. After abjuring our Lord
and Saviour, and blasphemously declaring Him to be an impostor, they
proceeded to decree, in the public assembly of the nation, the
adoration of Liberty and Equality as divinities: and they appointed
festivals besides in honour of Reason, the Country, the Constitution,
and the Virtues. Further, they determined that tutelary gods, even
dead men, may be canonized, consecrated, and worshipped; and they
enrolled in the number of these some of the most notorious infidels
and profligates of the last century. The remains of the two principal
of these were brought in solemn procession into one of their churches,
and placed upon the holy altar itself; incense was offered to them,
and the assembled multitude bowed down in worship before one of them—before
what remained on earth of an inveterate enemy of Christ.

Now, I do not mention all this as considering it the fulfilment of
the prophecy, nor, again, as if the fulfilment when it comes will be
in this precise way, but merely to point out, what the course of
events has shown to us in {71} these latter times, that there are
ways of fulfilling sacred announcements that seem at first sight
contradictory,—that men may oppose every existing worship, true and
false, and yet take up a worship of their own from pride, wantonness,
policy, superstition, fanaticism, or other reasons.

And further, let it be remarked, that there was a tendency in the
infatuated people I have spoken of, to introduce the old Roman
democratic worship, as if further to show us that Rome, the fourth
monster of the prophet's vision, is not dead. They even went so far as
to restore the worship of one of the Roman divinities (Ceres) by name,
raised a statue to her, and appointed a festival in her honour. This
indeed was inconsistent with exalting themselves "above all
that is called god;" but I mention the particular fact, as I have
said, not as throwing light upon the prophecy, but to show that the
spirit of old Rome has not passed from the world, though its name is
almost extinct.

Still further, it is startling to observe, that the former
Apostate, in the early times, the Emperor Julian, he too was engaged
in bringing back Roman Paganism.

Further still, let it be observed that Antiochus too, the
Antichrist before Christ, the persecutor of the Jews, he too
signalized himself in forcing the Pagan worship upon them, introducing
it even into the Temple.

We know not what is to come; but this we may safely say, that,
improbable as it is that Paganism should ever be publicly restored and
enforced by authority for any period, however short, even three years
and a half, yet it is far less improbable now than it was fifty years
ago, before the event occurred which I have referred to. Who would not
have been thought a madman or idiot, before that period, who had
conjectured such a portentous {72} approximation towards Paganism as
actually then took place?

4.

Now let us recur to the ancient Fathers, and see whether their
further anticipations do not run parallel to the events which have
since happened.

Antichrist, as they considered, will come out of the Roman Empire
just upon its destruction;—that is, the Roman Empire will in its
last days divide itself into ten parts, and the Enemy will come up
suddenly out of it upon these ten, and subdue three of them, or all of
them perhaps, and (as the prophet continues) "shall speak great
words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most
High, and think to change times and laws, and they shall be given into
His hand until a time, and times, and the dividing of time."
[Dan. vii. 25.] Now it is very observable, that one of the two early
Fathers whom I have already cited, Hippolytus, expressly says that the
ten states which will at length appear, though kingdoms, shall also be
democracies. I say this is observable, considering the present
state of the world, the tendency of things in this day towards
democracy, and the instance which has been presented to us of
democracy within the last fifty years, in those occurrences in France
to which I have already referred.

Another expectation of the early Church was, that the Roman
monster, after remaining torpid for centuries, would wake up at the
end of the world, and be restored in all its laws and forms; and this,
too, considering those same recent events to which I have referred, is
certainly worth noticing also. The same Father, who anticipates the
coming of democracies, expressly deduces from a passage in the xiiith
chapter of the Apocalypse, that {73} "the system of Augustus, who
was founder of the Roman Empire, shall be adopted and established by
him (Antichrist), in order to his own aggrandizement and glory. This
is the fourth monster whose head was wounded and healed; in that the
empire was destroyed and came to nought, and was divided into ten
diadems. But at this time Antichrist, as being an unscrupulous
villain, will heal and restore it; so that it will be active and
vigorous once more through the system which he establishes."
[Dan. vii. 27, 49.]

I will but notice one other expectation falling in with the
foregoing notion of the re-establishment of Roman power, entertained
by the two Fathers whom I have been quoting; viz., one concerning the
name of Antichrist, as spoken of in the xiiith chapter of the
Revelation: "Here is wisdom," says the inspired text;
"let him that hath understanding count his number, for it is the
number of a man, and his number is six hundred threescore and
six." Both Irenæus and Hippolytus give a name, the letters of
which together in Greek make up this number, characteristic of the
position of Antichrist as the head of the Roman Empire in its restored
state, viz., the word Latinus, or the Latin king.

Irenæus speaks as follows: "Expect that the empire will first
be divided into ten kings; then while they are reigning and beginning
to settle and aggrandize themselves, suddenly one will come and claim
the kingdom, and frighten them, having a name which contains the
predicted number (666); him recognize as the Abomination of
Desolation." Then he goes on to mention, together with two other
words, the name of Lateinos as answering to the number, and says of
it, "This is very probable, since it is the name of the last
empire;—for the Latins" (that is, the Romans) "are now in
power." [Note 2] {74}

And Hippolytus: "Since ... the wound of the first monster was
healed ... and it is plain that the Latins are still in power,
therefore he is called the Latin King (Latinus), the name passing from
an empire to an individual." [Note
3]

Whether this anticipation will be fulfilled or not, we cannot say.
I only mention it as showing the belief of the Fathers in the
restoration and re-establishment of the Roman Empire, which has
certainly since their day been more than once attempted.

It seems then, on the whole, that, as far as the testimony of the
early Church goes, Antichrist will be an open blasphemer, opposing
himself to every existing worship, true and false,—a persecutor, a
patron of the Jews, and a restorer of their worship, and, further, the
author of a novel kind of worship. Moreover, he will appear suddenly,
at the very end of the Roman Empire, which once was, and now is
dormant; that he will knit it into one, and engraft his Judaism and
his new worship (a sort of Paganism, it may be) upon the old
discipline of Cæsar Augustus; that in consequence he will earn the
title of the Latin or Roman King, as best expressive of his place and
character; lastly, that he will pass away as suddenly as he came.

5.

Now concerning this, I repeat, I do not wish to pronounce how far
the early Church was right or wrong in these anticipations, though
events since have seriously tended to strengthen its general
interpretations of Scripture prophecy.

It may be asked, however, What practical use is there in speaking
of these things, if they be doubtful? {75}

I answer, first, that it is not unprofitable to bear in mind that
we are still under what may be called a miraculous system. I do not
mean to maintain that literal miracles are taking place now every day,
but that our present state is a portion of a providential course,
which began in miracle, and, at least at the end of the world, if not
before, will end in miracle. The particular expectations above
detailed may be right or wrong; yet an Antichrist, whoever and
whatever he be, is to come; marvels are to come; the old Roman Empire
is not extinct; Satan, if bound, is bound but for a season; the
contest of good and evil is not ended. I repeat it, in the present
state of things, when the great object of education is supposed to be
the getting rid of things supernatural, when we are bid to laugh and
jeer at believing everything we do not see, are told to account for
everything by things known and ascertained, and to assay every
statement by the touchstone of experience, I must think that this
vision of Antichrist, as a supernatural power to come, is a great
providential gain, as being a counterpoise to the evil tendencies of
the age.

And next, it must surely be profitable for our thoughts to be sent
backward and forward to the beginning and the end of the Gospel times,
to the first and the second coming of Christ. What we want, is to
understand that we are in the place in which the early Christians
were, with the same covenant, ministry, sacraments, and duties;—to
realize a state of things long past away;—to feel that we are in a
sinful world, a world lying in wickedness; to discern our position in
it, that we are witnesses in it, that reproach and suffering are our
portion,—so that we must not "think it strange" if they
come upon us, but a kind of gracious exception if they do not; to have
our hearts awake, as if we had seen Christ and {76} His Apostles, and
seen their miracles,—awake to the hope and waiting of His second
coming, looking out for it, nay, desiring to see the tokens of it;
thinking often and much of the judgment to come, dwelling on and
adequately entering into the thought, that we individually shall be
judged. All these surely are acts of true and saving faith; and this
is one substantial use of the Book of Revelation, and other
prophetical parts of Scripture, quite distinct from our knowing their
real interpretation, viz., to take the veil from our eyes, to lift up
the covering which lies over the face of the world, and make us see
day by day, as we go in and out, as we get up and lie down, as we
labour, and walk, and rest, and recreate ourselves, the Throne of God
set up in the midst of us, His majesty and His judgments, His Son's
continual intercession for the elect, their trials, and their victory.

Notes

1. Iren Hær. v. 25. Hippol. de Antichristo, § 25. St. Cyril of
Jerusalem also speaks of Antichrist building the Jewish Temple; and he
too wrote before Julian's attempt, and (what is remarkable) prophesied
it would fail, because of the prophecies.—Vide Ruff. Hist. i.
37.Return to text

2. He adds, that he himself prefers one of the
other words.Return to text